Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port numbers
Bernie Volz <bevolz@gmail.com> Mon, 26 February 2024 11:14 UTC
Return-Path: <bevolz@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CCF6C14F6B7 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 03:14:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 29C6ao6MSlSe for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 03:14:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x835.google.com (mail-qt1-x835.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::835]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E28FC14F6A6 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 03:14:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x835.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-42e8e85a969so1141781cf.2 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 03:14:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1708946067; x=1709550867; darn=ietf.org; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version :from:content-transfer-encoding:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=2ySC4nhtxFXPPX2J/5XG9YRMhyc/BcjhBrZSgbg/dro=; b=f3RLMoJHgq/RwglIgZFZhiIRW/BtAs5BqChHs4SQHsqFRlQdFkHXuoNf0nj7ej2u2y RaGtaFNkblJroBY3Sz0Imjf97e/rFunR8hTi88IYBypGpXP0lHjaHZLAWHCEL/APmQt/ W67TnVlzWlhRWqvbdo+v5ZvrRj6u+KHxdUeqpEcRLQ/d05zxX89MZOuKGvdDPvK6tVSt M7Nh/jMjCG0d7FRAk9Z4GsLHAgafkz3+9LUnFdmOJ5KGVtfcNMk0yoPn+rsHTZZbEl18 Qnv5miELu5liAIbXu3ek6F1DX/vbhYQKTIe7sR1CQWneBdZ72Sjo7gSqemiUoogkddI9 beOg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1708946067; x=1709550867; h=to:in-reply-to:cc:references:message-id:date:subject:mime-version :from:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=2ySC4nhtxFXPPX2J/5XG9YRMhyc/BcjhBrZSgbg/dro=; b=PoVqFodwPcRQqny7FvkBUmdlhlztt0pE9XZ/Op3kazJGh2AeZPy92f66mj1Bu0nRMb SGzYQd24GzEYPfeQA1Umjapfi2pAVT4+Jg/aqOaqWMKVobmpJeWlmQMRdUMuKQQpoyTL K+8Y+LiyUFNLqrjV4VwNF9IZLMslvyjuKcYAINzFyOVMwDr6Luubpb5rFlVyR6A/dpEd m8u9zLveWxv43sCBXpFU39kyXgFlq/hI3qbJSje8Okt2TmpW3Q/x0VI0WG8lvUPnVVo7 3/IrkSxsjsXDZUpU/+t8FpAqEXAocT+54lfvT1Wo9bizteGvrvUTBTBVeVbIKyr/hAlF J3NQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzbsULOeg91LsBCupKrm3gAzOjEGdP76wBvanzS9hsXdIbaZXJX febtrTlo9RaOHfmu8h72dDDXCje7IeiHqVLiGxlW2v8HWySKGEpvz+xl6WlmWQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGnXvSLfnfcgriIB3Hjj4KYxpHLVp9FT33RXpTkpyd6bNskoiRG9JO0Xle2R+SaT9mrwXMKyA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:178f:b0:42e:5a10:27f0 with SMTP id s15-20020a05622a178f00b0042e5a1027f0mr7789716qtk.8.1708946066977; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 03:14:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (d-69-161-122-95.nh.cpe.atlanticbb.net. [69.161.122.95]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g7-20020ac80707000000b0042dfa55a3d5sm2315436qth.25.2024.02.26.03.14.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 26 Feb 2024 03:14:26 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Bernie Volz <bevolz@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 06:14:15 -0500
Message-Id: <57DFF11C-CA3B-4528-A318-F0A01E82AC80@gmail.com>
References: <20240226.150017.738223219320498350.tsahara@iij.ad.jp>
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <20240226.150017.738223219320498350.tsahara@iij.ad.jp>
To: Tomoyuki Sahara <tsahara=40iij.ad.jp@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (21D61)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/tOiRtFI15I50x93A-vqkXXLYkJ8>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port numbers
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Dynamic Host Configuration <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:14:33 -0000
No. Normal UDP communication rules apply. A client sends traffic to a well-known destination port and it is free to select whatever port number it likes as the source port. The server’s response is sent from that well known port (as source port) and sent to the client’s selected port (as destination port). This is normal communication and dhcpv6 follows it. That is why nothing is said or needs to be said about the client source port. - Bernie Volz > On Feb 26, 2024, at 1:00 AM, Tomoyuki Sahara <tsahara=40iij.ad.jp@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Hi, DHC wg members: > > Can we make recommendations on source port numbers of DHCP6 messages > in rfc8415bis? > > DHCP6 specification says that DHCP6 clients and servers listen on UDP > port 546 and 547 respectively, in RFC8415 section 7.2. It implies > that DHCP6 clients MUST send messages to UDP port 547 (server port) and > servers MUST send messages to UDP port 546 (client port) to work with > their counterpart correctly (though restrictions can be relaxed with > RFC8357 for relays). > > But it says nothing about source port numbers. Without any > restrictions, some implementations use ephemeral source port > (e.g. 12345) to send their messages. DHCP6 conversations look like: > > 1. client send Solicit fe80::2#49876 -> ff02::1:2#547 > 2. server send Advertise fe80::1#547 -> fe80::2#546 (!) > 3. client send Request fe80::2#49877(?) -> ff02::1:2#547 > 4. server send Confirm fe80::1#547 -> fe80::2#546 > > This behavior is not prohibited by the specification but makes > confusions for DHCP6 implementer and network/firewall operators (*1). > Most Internet protocols nowadays assume that servers send response > messages from the port number they received on. > (*1 e.g. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=952126 ) > > In my humble opinion, it is too late to require that DHCP6 client and > server MUST send messages from the fixed port number (546/547) because > there are too many DHCP6 implementations in the wild. But making a > recommendation is helpful for new implementations/deployments of DHCP6. > > An idea to make such recommendation is adding a text in rfc8415bis: > > OLD: > 7.2. UDP Ports > Clients listen for DHCP messages on UDP port 546. Servers and > relay agents listen for DHCP messages on UDP port 547. > > NEW: > 7.2. UDP Ports > Clients listen for DHCP messages on UDP port 546. Servers and > relay agents listen for DHCP messages on UDP port 547. > > Clients are RECOMMENDED to send DHCP messages from UDP port 546. > Servers and relay agents are RECOMMENDED to send DHCP messages > from UDP port 547 (unless relay agent includes Relay Source Port > Option for DHCP6 [RFC8357]). > > I know WGLC has been concluded but I believe the recommendations above > encourage new implementations to use the standard DHCP6 port numbers > on UDP source port. > > > Best regards, > Tomoyuki Sahara > > > _______________________________________________ > dhcwg mailing list > dhcwg@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Tomoyuki Sahara
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port numbe… Tomoyuki Sahara
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Tomoyuki Sahara
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Troan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Mark Smith
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Tomoyuki Sahara
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Tomoyuki Sahara
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Troan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Troan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Troan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Troan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… David Farmer
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Robert Nagy
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Alan DeKok
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… David Farmer
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Troan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… David Farmer
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Trøan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… David Farmer
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… rob@deepdivenetworklng.com
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… David Farmer
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ted Lemon
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… rob@deepdivenetworklng.com
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… rob@deepdivenetworklng.com
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Michael Richardson
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… rob@deepdivenetworklng.com
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Robert Nagy
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Michael Richardson
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Troan
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Bernie Volz
- Re: [dhcwg] recommendation on DHCP6 source port n… Ole Troan